• @drathvedro@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    234 months ago

    This was already a thing for ages until they killed it, but it is still possible if you are okay with tweaking userChrome.css

    Why Mozilla wastes resources on their own implementation instead of providing API’s to third party developers is beyond me.

      • @Pantherina@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        44 months ago

        This person said XUL is insecure! Any Palemoon users here? Anyone wanting to tell them that Mozilla is totally taking away user Freedom and that Palemoon is a totally secure Browser? XD

      • @drathvedro@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        34 months ago

        Admittedly, yes, XUL was a complete shitfest. Though I remember that it was more due to security patches and poor memory management that caused the apparent poor performance, not so much for addons. I was on waterfox classic at the time of writing of this article and had like 30 addons enabled, including TST, CRT, and TileTabs. all non-e10s-blocking, and, I assure you, it was just as fast(and slow) as quantum.

        But, that’s besides the point. Customization, especially via addon’s, was one of the defining features of Firefox. Before, you had opera, which you could customize it within certain limits, Firefox if you want full control, and IE if you’re a dummy. Now, you have Vivaldi if you want customization within certain limits, Chrome if you’re a dummy, and Firefox is… just… not chrome? I’d say the addons should’ve been kept at all costs, maybe in a different way, without amputating the whole browser. But they did and it lost it’s appeal to a major portion of people. Of course there are still exclusive features like container tabs and min vid, but those are not exclusive to quantum either. The whole ordeal sounds just like that time when Yandex, in order to solve a support ticket overflow, just removed the contact support button.